WHy is everyone bashing SoE regarding the vanguard issue?
Sigil designed Vanguard, not SoE. Sigil is responsible for the game's failure, not SoE. People are not quitting because SoE is taking over, people are quitting since the game was in beta, simply because it sucks, and that's Sigil's own doing. Give SoE a break. Beside failing EQ2 launch and SWG NGE 2 years ago, it's not like they have been making crap games for the past 1( years...
If I can correct you on this, SOE bought Vanguard from Sigil due to Sigil financial issues. SOE pushed for the premature release of Vanguard not Sigil.
Planetside (great game, but due to poor management from SOE the game is all screwed up. Poor maintenance, poor updates, raising the monthly subcription after doing an update.. pathetic, etc)
SWG (Do I need to say anything about this game?)
EQ 2 (Good game, unfortunately the greed of SOE shined on this game 3 expansions and 3 adventure packs, all at cost nothing for free or discounted for player loyalty)
Vanguard (Good game, unfortunately released 3 months before it should)
Matrix Online (LOL this is joke or a game)
Seems to me that there is more than 1 or 2 games in question
No you are wrong.
1.) Sigil took about 5 years and 30 million dollars to develop this title.
2.) Sigil was orginally signed up with Microsoft.
3.) Microsoft dumped Sigil because they were not meeting their benchmarks and the game was clearly behind in development.
4.) Sigil went shopping for a new publisher after being dumped by Microsoft. They found one called SOE and signed a contract with SOE.
5.) The contracted deal allowed SOE the right to manage the servers and advertise the game in exchange for giving Sigil continued development dollars in order to get the game out the door.
6.) Sigil are currently the owners of Vangaurd.
7.) Sigil still have development control over Vangaurd hence the post of Brad suggesting the eventual selling out of their development control of VG to SOE.
Brad and the gang have yet again run out of steam, money and ability and now they can't fix their broken game. Out of all the publishers Sigil could of gone with they decided to go with SOE because Brad knew that if things went wrong he could sell out to SOE like he did with EQ1.
Please get your facts straight before posting on the internet again.
You should also get your facts straight. You are being too generous and giving SOE a complete pass.
It is a fact that SOE developers worked on Vanguard prior to it being released. Therefore they knew what kind of condition the game was in, and that is was not ready to be launched, yet they marketed it as being complete and released it as ready.
Launching an incomplete and buggy product is a recipe for failure, and either SOE is completely clueless or they acted fraudulently with Sigil.
Some of what you say is true but one thing you fail to realize is that a marketing campaign doesn't take place overnight. What little advertising that was done for Vanguard was planned and started well before any release date. While SOE development may have known of the problems it was probably too late to do anything about them. SOE marketing probably began their marketing campaign almost as soon as Sigl and SOE came to an agreement. Even if SOE devs knew about all the problems, once the ball started rolling they were powerless to stop it. So all they could do was fix as much as they could before the live date.
Bottom line is that Vanguard's condition and predicament lies solely on the heads of Brad McQuaid and Jeff Butler. They were the leadership at Sigil. They mismanaged time and money and despite what they say were given the boot by Microsoft. SOE may be guilty of many things but in the case of Vanguard they really tried to help. It's sort of like Bioware's relationship with Obsidian. Vanguard would have never been released in any form had SOE not bailed Sigil out. I'm not so sure SOE taking over is such a bad thing. They have the manpower and resources to put into it to get things straightened out. From a game player's perspective SOE may be evil and a bunch of foul ups but they are a business. Everything they do is motivated towards making them and their shareholders more money. Sometimes they goof up (SWG) and sometimes they end up making good (EQ2). If anybody could turn Vanguard around and make a profit with it my bet is on SOE. They may be an lot of things but they know how to make money.
EQ2 is an example of failure. The game has changed fundamentally so many times, it's alienated more players than it's drawn in. It has never been the success SOE anticipated or desired, even though they said they were making a game players wanted based on years of feedback and experience from EQ1. They obviously were not paying attention. EQ2 has 50% less subscribers than from it's peak at release, dropping from a high of about 350k to currently 175k or so.
Actually subs are up quite a bit lately. I would hardly call EQ2 a failure. Just because you did not like the changes does not mean that most of us agree with you.
And I would point out that EQ2 still has about 3x the subs that VG does.
You have to admit that EQ2 didn't even meet half of its initial projections in the first year or so. Down 50% subscribers and consolidating servers is a failure. It may not be a bankruptcy close the doors failure, but that is a failure considering the overhead and expected return on investment. It set quite a few standards of what not to do in MMOs and business sense.
If McQuaid or SOE would actually make a vision and stick to it and release a polished game that met it's initial promises it might be a stellar success. Instead they make mass changes and tick off their current player base who liked the game as is in hopes of stealing WOW's thunder or in hopes of getting back the 500,000 that was glued to EQI.
Well the fact is, EQ1 was hardly ever a polished game until perhaps the past couple of years.
In fact, a good portion of what many people liked about EQ1 were actually unintended gameplay, bugs, or exploits that were never fixed.
Things like fear kiting, FD pulls, and many other things were NEVER intended, yet it became standard procedure to the point where Brad pretended it was actually "working as intended".
Very very solid points. It really made me think about some of the EQ nostalgia in a new light.
Oh my... I dunno, somehow I despair over the dominance of black/white thinking. VG is boring and cold enough atm for me not to play it. But it is not that VG is a total disaster with no base to build on. Its complicated and the odds arent good but it is not necessarily doomed.
And fyi: SOE is as good or bad as ANY game company is. They all made some things good and some bad and some plain ugly, so come down from your high moral judgement thrones back to reality. Objectively the probability that SOE will save the game is a great as they screw it. There isnt any really logical reason for a biased assumption what will happen if SOE gets control. There are many scenarios and I cant see any of them is more valid atm as the other scenarios. Get a grip and admit you dont know the future just as I dont.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
If McQuaid or SOE would actually make a vision and stick to it and release a polished game that met it's initial promises it might be a stellar success. Instead they make mass changes and tick off their current player base who liked the game as is in hopes of stealing WOW's thunder or in hopes of getting back the 500,000 that was glued to EQI.
Well the fact is, EQ1 was hardly ever a polished game until perhaps the past couple of years.
In fact, a good portion of what many people liked about EQ1 were actually unintended gameplay, bugs, or exploits that were never fixed.
Things like fear kiting, FD pulls, and many other things were NEVER intended, yet it became standard procedure to the point where Brad pretended it was actually "working as intended".
Very very solid points. It really made me think about some of the EQ nostalgia in a new light. I wasn't saying EQI was perfect. I'm just saying that SOE and McQuaid both have been sitting around scratching their butts for 7 years now trying to figure out how to break that 500,000 mark that they hit with EQI. What they miss completely is that people were forgiving of the problems back then but now in the shadow of WOW you have to release a polished product. EQ2 and SWG easilly could have broke 500,000 subscribers if they had not released both as unfinished crap. SWG could've broke a million or two if it had been done right but even it got 300,000+ subscribers as a buggy unfinished game based on the IP. Now we see buggy and unfinished instead drops you into the barely breaking 100,000 subscriber category with VG (just guessing could be lower now).
I just stopped back to see how things were going with this game. Doesn't look too good!
I played back in beta and I gave up. OMG, it was horrible! I had a lot of hopes for this game, too. But I can't say after reading McQuaid's latest that it changed my mind. Things look totally worse now than ever.
I just stopped back to see how things were going with this game.
Unfortunately, as one who has resubscribed, I know it is difficult if not impossible to obtain an accurate, fair, and honest idea about the current state of Vanguard. I would not use MMORPG Vanguard forums for reliable information on Vanguard because people who currently play the game are subjected to trolling, flaming, and personal attacks. Individuals who currently play the game and want to discuss the game and what is it like today will often not bother because it is not worth being subjected to trolling, flaming, and the general hatred that people emotionally vomit. Further, there is a lot of hatred toward this game, and sometimes people direct that hatred toward current Vanguard-players on this forum. Nevertheless, they are angry and use (abuse) MMORPG to vent that anger.
I just stopped back to see how things were going with this game.
Unfortunately, as one who has resubscribed, I know it is difficult if not impossible to obtain an accurate, fair, and honest idea about the current state of Vanguard. I would not use MMORPG Vanguard forums for reliable information on Vanguard because people who currently play the game are subjected to trolling, flaming, and personal attacks. Individuals who currently play the game and want to discuss the game and what is it like today will often not bother because it is not worth being subjected to trolling, flaming, and the general hatred that people emotionally vomit. Further, there is a lot of hatred toward this game, and sometimes people direct that hatred toward current Vanguard-players on this forum. Nevertheless, they are angry and use (abuse) MMORPG to vent that anger.
Considering I can go back in your post history and see you slamming the game just a few weeks ago makes me wonder about the validity of your assertions about the game. If the game has changed so drastically then why don't you start a new thread with a comprehensive review and a comparison of how the game was just a few weeks ago when you called it a nightmare with how you are finding it today.
I would much rather read something like that as opposed to you hitting every single thread and making personal attacks on people who don't happen to agree with your point of view.
Considering I can go back in your post history and see you slamming the game just a few weeks ago makes me wonder about the validity of your assertions about the game.
If the game has changed so drastically then why don't you start a new thread with a comprehensive review and a comparison of how the game was just a few weeks ago when you called it a nightmare with how you are finding it today.
I think that is an excellent and fair piont, smg777. My analysis of the game was its condition at release. I have been censored (not for flaming/trolling/dishonesty) on other forums for criticism of Vanguard. I rely on MMORPG for information shared among members of the community and their honest impressions about games in their current state.
However, after I resubscribed (on a whim) I did realize that what the flamers/trollers/haters were stating was very far removed from the current state of the game. When I began to talk about changes and the need for an objective, truthful, and unbiased discussion on the current state of Vanguard, my integrity was attacked, I have been trolled (and continue to be), and subjected to repeated (and ongoing) name-calling. I can emotionally sustain these attacks, but it still requires me to return to my point, which is that people who currently play the game are subjected to mean-spirited and dishonest flaming/trolling/hating that prevents meaningful discussion, artistic expression, and a fair and balanced view of Vanguard. The trolls/haters/flamers are very deliberately trying (and in many respects, I concede, succeeding) to stifle discussion here by their disdainful and morally reprehensible tactics.
I am confident in stating that the haters/trollers/flamers who abuse MMORPG are not harming Vanguard but undermining a sense of community, vibrant discussion, and even decency at MMORPG.
WHy is everyone bashing SoE regarding the vanguard issue?
Sigil designed Vanguard, not SoE.
Sigil is responsible for the game's failure, not SoE.
People are not quitting because SoE is taking over, people are quitting since the game was in beta, simply because it sucks, and that's Sigil's own doing.
Give SoE a break. Beside failing EQ2 launch and SWG NGE 2 years ago, it's not like they have been making crap games for the past 1( years...
1.) WHy is everyone bashing SoE regarding the vanguard issue? [ Because SOE has ruined 3/4th of the games they have created or marketed with other companies. ]
2.) Sigil designed Vanguard, not SoE. [ Sigil did design it but SOE still has rights to do what they please because they put money into it for developing. ]
Sigil is responsible for the game's failure, not SoE. [ SOE is responsible just as Sigil is, They are marketed together DUMBSHIT. ]
3.) People are not quitting because SoE is taking over, people are quitting since the game was in beta, simply because it sucks, and that's Sigil's own doing. [ People are quiting because of SOE is taking over, 90% of SOE's Fan base does not trust nor like SOE anymore, Anything to do with SOE game wise is like giving your money free to them for half-ass product(s). ]
4.) Give SoE a break. Beside failing EQ2 launch and SWG NGE 2 years ago, it's not like they have been making crap games for the past 1( years...
[ The day SOE gets a break is the day they stop fu**ing up games they have took over or made. I would rather buy a missle launcher and blow their servers up just to end the repeated $hit they keep doing to their customers. ]
I would rather buy a missle launcher and blow their servers up just to end the repeated $hit they keep doing to their customers. ]
I do not like SOE, for the record.
However, the name-calling such as "dumbshit" and the language and the abuse is what I mean when I am referring to an environment in this section that is disgraceful from the trolling/flaming/hating.
I would rather buy a missle launcher and blow their servers up just to end the repeated $hit they keep doing to their customers. ]
I do not like SOE, for the record.
However, the name-calling such as "dumbshit" and the language and the abuse is what I mean when I am referring to an environment in this section that is disgraceful from the trolling/flaming/hating.
Ive been ripped off from SOE playing their games, So please pardon my language but thats how I feel towards them personally. If you don't like it or have a problem with it then take a flying leap into a dumpster.
Hell, how long do they NEED to figure the exact terms between Sigil and SOE? "Is it in their nature to make us wait this long?"
I'm wondering if Mcquaid is trying to broker some deal with Sony to sell a portion of the rights to them while maintaning creative control of the game.
I really can't see Sony buying into only a portion of the IP.
Hell, how long do they NEED to figure the exact terms between Sigil and SOE? "Is it in their nature to make us wait this long?"
I'm wondering if Mcquaid is trying to broker some deal with Sony to sell a portion of the rights to them while maintaning creative control of the game.
I really can't see Sony buying into only a portion of the IP.
Wish they would speed the process up.
I will be as fair as I can. I dont know Brad Mcquaid, never followed his doings in the past, never played EQ1 (besides the trial). I dunno for what he stood or stands. For me, he is just a name. I do know he was the creative leader behind VG, and as it is he has failed in a lot of things. He had 5 years and 30-40 million dollars, much more than most MMO developer have. He had quite a good credit as far as I see and, his own company, which was not burdened with any previous game's weight. In that way he had the best possible chances and he failed. WHY in the name of the devil should ANY company pay HIS debts and leave him in charge after the utter and deep failure?
As it looks he is the problem, not part of the solution. Simply said, he was the captain of the "ship" and the captain is 100% responsible, no matter if he himself really made all the decisions. If the entire thing would have been great he would have the greatest benefit, so its only fair and square he takes the resposibility and leaves someone else in charge. Whoever is not for me to say, I dont even know. Maybe Raph Koster, if I had a free shot to find someone, adding a few Blizzard & Lotro guys. (Spare me the flame, its my opionion. I dont want VG = WOW nor do I think it is like WOW, but they made some things good and you dont need to re-invent the wheel every time. Period.) VG cant and must not be a copy of anything, but some things just ARE proven to work, to be successfull and highly accplaimed. A game that costy in development NEEDS a lot of players, and therefore a certain kowtow to mass market desires. That is a fact and not negotiable.
The most imporant thing IMO what they should answer now is not so much the technical details of the new contracts, policy or whatever. I would like to see a detailled and CLEAR answer where VG is heading to, not some Brad-esque PR hogwash! No more blah blah like "Core gamer" and such mumbo jumbo, I want FACTS, real plans what they change, implement and what remains as it is. No guarantees, but something to get a real understanding where the train is headed to. I think no matter what side you're on we can all agree we want a CLEAR and real answer what the future re-launch will show.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
I just stopped back to see how things were going with this game.
Unfortunately, as one who has resubscribed, I know it is difficult if not impossible to obtain an accurate, fair, and honest idea about the current state of Vanguard. I would not use MMORPG Vanguard forums for reliable information on Vanguard because people who currently play the game are subjected to trolling, flaming, and personal attacks. Individuals who currently play the game and want to discuss the game and what is it like today will often not bother because it is not worth being subjected to trolling, flaming, and the general hatred that people emotionally vomit. Further, there is a lot of hatred toward this game, and sometimes people direct that hatred toward current Vanguard-players on this forum. Nevertheless, they are angry and use (abuse) MMORPG to vent that anger.
It's ok. I didn't have time to read too many of the replies. Brad tends to write so much, it's hard to go through anything else.
If you went through my posting history, it would probably look the same. Way back when, I was really hyped into something new to try. Being an ex-EQ player, this seemed really special and hopeful. But when I got into VG beta, I wasn't only disappointed, I just didn't see them fixing ALL that stuff in the allotted time frame. When they spent even more time changing existing systems, I was convinced it wasn't going to happen. And then there was my own system that couldn't handle it and between the boredom I was experiencing and the frustration I was having with a brand new system, I knew I wouldn't be happy with the launch results. Progress was going very slowly and major decisions were still up in the air, so you knew then that time wasn't on their side. That's kinda the stuff that you do before you even hire a team (I think?), but I'm hardly an expert. That was just my gut feeling.
I scanned a few replies tonight and these are actually not so bad from what I remember of the beta forums. I guess if I stuck it out as long as you guys have I would be saying things out of frustration too, so I do understand both sides.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but reading Brad's post gave me the impression that SOE will probably take the game over eventually. That just means to me that once/if they do even more systems will be revamped and that's going to take even longer. So the sooner they make a decision, the better off those of you still playing will be, I guess. It seems like a lot more patience is going to be required of you and that's asking a lot considering what I'm reading is the current state of the game.
Regardless where your frustration level is at, I have to give all of you a lot of credit for sticking it through this long. It wasn't something I had the time for with work and all. This one took a lot of dedication, patience and gamer expertise. So don't be too hard on yourselves. None of this is your fault. All of your persistence in following it through this far is quite amazing!
I know that doesn't help too much but I don't know what else to say. I'm so sad for all of you.
1) Knowing nothing about the soon to be agreement. I find it hard to believe possible that they could even consider shutting down, and relaunching or allowing free play until they are ready to relauch in the fall. Financially that would be a massive hit, look at the amount of money already dumped in, and then realize that they'd lose all revenue, and STILL have to dump more money in to get it in a worthwile state. It's never been done before, and can you imagine the negative press, and word of mouth the game would receive as a result, even with a re-launch? Sorry, I just dont see it, pitiful stream of revenue or not, I think they have to keep servers open thru it.
2) EQ2 might have picked up more subscribers with the games overall improvement, but they released a few weeks before WoW, and they wanted to be King of the Hill, for their investment, they are only around 350,000 subscribers, which is even lower than VG is suggesting possible for it. In fact, the high point of EQ-dom, only saw 500,000 subscribers, and EQ2 has not even reached that level, YET. Dont get me wrong, game might be great, and many people may have migrated back to it, but it's still not at 2001-2002 subscriber levels of it's namesake game.
3) Here's where Brad just doesnt get it. He's talking about former EQ1 players who are still out there, of the 2 million who played it. Guess what big guy, there is a REASON that they dont anymore. For many folks, it was growing up, getting older, and not having the same time they once did to invest. They found that with a faster, simpler game, they did not need to be hardcore, and spend 8 hours a day playing, they could feel the same reward in less time. When confronted with choice, well....EQ1 and EQ 2 sub's havent done all that well. I'm not suggesting it's that way for all those folks, maybe many would flock back, but up until now, it hasnt happened, and with more choices, the market gives people a better chance to find something they like. Guess what....some folks when presented with choices, learned that for them there are better ways to do things..a la instancing. (no, it's not everyone's choice, but again, some folks found logging on to do an instanced dungeon more enjoyable than having nothing but contested mobs) It's not that one way or the other is better, but those choices attack the former player base he THOUGHT he once had. For a visionary, he got locked into ONE idea, and completely missed where the market had gone. For a visionary....he was blind.
4) Someone is going to have to pay off that original 30 million, so I dont see it going away completely, UNLESS SoE and Sigil cant strike an agreement. If SOE buys it for pennies on the dollar, they can afford to pay it little attention, consolidate servers, and maybe still make money on it with 100-200k sub's, something Sigil probably can not afford to do right now.
5) Re-launch in the fall....further competition. Pirates of the Burning Sea seems to have a raid fanbase, although I dont know how many it has, Age of Conan was pushed back even though most content was done, in order to release with max possible polish. Warhammer is early next year, and games like Gods and Heroes and Tabula Rasa are due this year as well. While they may not all appeal to people tired of WoW, each of them WILL take a small contingent that COULD have been VG's. Will people upgrade their systems to eventually be able to be capable of playing VG? Sure, but the better question, is: A year from now, with upgraded systems, and even more choices to be made, will anyone even remember to come back to give VG a shot again, with it's already stained rep?
Originally posted by Baikal 3) Here's where Brad just doesnt get it. He's talking about former EQ1 players who are still out there, of the 2 million who played it. Guess what big guy, there is a REASON that they dont anymore. For many folks, it was growing up, getting older, and not having the same time they once did to invest. They found that with a faster, simpler game, they did not need to be hardcore, and spend 8 hours a day playing, they could feel the same reward in less time.
I disagree on two points but agree on one. First, you do not have to be hardcore at all to play Vanguard. The availability of content to log-in and accomplish something meaningful and fun is abundant (more so than WoW, I have found). Second, I think Vanguard is geared toward a more sophisticated and mature gamer; these people really do not want to play LotR or WoW. The market does exist, but Vanguard's atrocious launch created a bad impression it has to recover from. I recently resubscribed, and there is no question they are absolutely making tremendous progress. However, you will not read that here.
I agree on the point that SIGIL (Brad) overestimated the size and extent of this market. The marketing of Vanguard on old Everquest guilds such as FoH was perplexing for me. Vanguard is an enormous game and complex game, and your effectiveness often is determined by your decisions at home in terms of what stances to use, what spells to use, how to use your points and so forth.
In conclusion, I do not think "dumbing" Vanguard down to a LotR or WoW level is necessary. Instead, I think they should steadily keep on the course they are on (believe it or not if you do not currently play the game!) and fix bugs and improve performance.
3) Here's where Brad just doesnt get it. He's talking about former EQ1 players who are still out there, of the 2 million who played it. Guess what big guy, there is a REASON that they dont anymore. For many folks, it was growing up, getting older, and not having the same time they once did to invest. They found that with a faster, simpler game, they did not need to be hardcore, and spend 8 hours a day playing, they could feel the same reward in less time. When confronted with choice, well....EQ1 and EQ 2 sub's havent done all that well. I'm not suggesting it's that way for all those folks, maybe many would flock back, but up until now, it hasnt happened, and with more choices, the market gives people a better chance to find something they like. Guess what....some folks when presented with choices, learned that for them there are better ways to do things..a la instancing. (no, it's not everyone's choice, but again, some folks found logging on to do an instanced dungeon more enjoyable than having nothing but contested mobs) It's not that one way or the other is better, but those choices attack the former player base he THOUGHT he once had. For a visionary, he got locked into ONE idea, and completely missed where the market had gone. For a visionary....he was blind.
I'm a 35 year old former EQ player who loved playing it for years. The reason I don't play EQ, EQ2, WoW, SWG, SB, CoH, CoV, DAoC and damn near every other MMO on the market today is because they are ALL faster and simpler. Even Vanguard has fallen into the same routine of making the game so "casual friendly" that there is just no sense of accomplishment. It is so easy for single player games to cater to people who like quick/easy games AND those who prefer a longer/harder version by simply adding different challenge levels.(easy/normal/difficult) If everyone wanted an easy game, why do so many single player games offer different levels of challenge?
How many games on todays market offer challenging progression from lowest to highest level? None that I know of. They have all gone the easy route and honestly I cannot blame anyone for staying in a game they presently enjoy instead of switching to another easy game that they have to start from scratch. Hell look at the LoTRO forums and 2 weeks after launch people are already complaining that the game is too simple and boring. Sorry, not everyone wants to go the simple/easy route you are trying to sell.
When players are soloing from 1-50 in less than 2 months I really have a hard time understanding how people can claim that VG was made for hardcore gamers. Maybe they still believe core is short for hardcore, I don't know, it just boggles me that anyone would think VG is anything but a casual game. They have barely implemented any raiding what-so-ever so all you really have is solo and group content. Yet I keep reading posts about how VG was made for the hardcore raiders?
Sorry, I just don't get all of these posts promoting simple games when you have about 30 of them on the market now competing for the same player base and none left for those who seek a challenge.
Originally posted by Murashu Vanguard has fallen into the same routine of making the game so "casual friendly" that there is just no sense of accomplishment.
When players are soloing from 1-50 in less than 2 months I really have a hard time understanding how people can claim that VG was made for hardcore gamers.
Maybe they still believe core is short for hardcore, I don't know, it just boggles me that anyone would think VG is anything but a casual game.
They have barely implemented any raiding what-so-ever so all you really have is solo and group content. Yet I keep reading posts about how VG was made for the hardcore raiders?
I agree completely. The amount of available solo content from tasks, Quests, epic Quests, and missives is far-reaching in Vanguard. The direction might be to "dumb" down Vanguard, but I do not necessarily think solo content does that. However, MMORPGs in general, in particular LotR, are very linear, forced, and in a general sense easy. The sense of challenge, the spice of danger, and thrill are just not there.
3) Here's where Brad just doesnt get it. He's talking about former EQ1 players who are still out there, of the 2 million who played it. Guess what big guy, there is a REASON that they dont anymore. For many folks, it was growing up, getting older, and not having the same time they once did to invest. They found that with a faster, simpler game, they did not need to be hardcore, and spend 8 hours a day playing, they could feel the same reward in less time. When confronted with choice, well....EQ1 and EQ 2 sub's havent done all that well. I'm not suggesting it's that way for all those folks, maybe many would flock back, but up until now, it hasnt happened, and with more choices, the market gives people a better chance to find something they like. Guess what....some folks when presented with choices, learned that for them there are better ways to do things..a la instancing. (no, it's not everyone's choice, but again, some folks found logging on to do an instanced dungeon more enjoyable than having nothing but contested mobs) It's not that one way or the other is better, but those choices attack the former player base he THOUGHT he once had. For a visionary, he got locked into ONE idea, and completely missed where the market had gone. For a visionary....he was blind.
I'm a 35 year old former EQ player who loved playing it for years. The reason I don't play EQ, EQ2, WoW, SWG, SB, CoH, CoV, DAoC and damn near every other MMO on the market today is because they are ALL faster and simpler. Even Vanguard has fallen into the same routine of making the game so "casual friendly" that there is just no sense of accomplishment. It is so easy for single player games to cater to people who like quick/easy games AND those who prefer a longer/harder version by simply adding different challenge levels.(easy/normal/difficult) If everyone wanted an easy game, why do so many single player games offer different levels of challenge?
How many games on todays market offer challenging progression from lowest to highest level? None that I know of. They have all gone the easy route and honestly I cannot blame anyone for staying in a game they presently enjoy instead of switching to another easy game that they have to start from scratch. Hell look at the LoTRO forums and 2 weeks after launch people are already complaining that the game is too simple and boring. Sorry, not everyone wants to go the simple/easy route you are trying to sell.
When players are soloing from 1-50 in less than 2 months I really have a hard time understanding how people can claim that VG was made for hardcore gamers. Maybe they still believe core is short for hardcore, I don't know, it just boggles me that anyone would think VG is anything but a casual game. They have barely implemented any raiding what-so-ever so all you really have is solo and group content. Yet I keep reading posts about how VG was made for the hardcore raiders?
Sorry, I just don't get all of these posts promoting simple games when you have about 30 of them on the market now competing for the same player base and none left for those who seek a challenge.
Couple of things....
I'd submit that you are in the minority of people out there, and simple things like subscriber numbers for games would bear that out. I'm not saying that as a negative or even a bad thing, but it's also saying that the mainstream games arent attractive to you, but they are attractive to a much larger group of people than you. You may not like faster and simpler, that's fine, but I'd wager for each person like you, I could probably pull down at least 10 people who do, just by going to forums like WoW, and all the other games you mention. There is nothing wrong with what you like, I'm just saying it's simply not mainstream. (that's no comment on good or bad)
It's tough to launch the 2nd most expensive MMO to date, and have it seeking a niche market. Call it sub 500k. Only reason I use that number is because that's what EQ was at it's peak, and because that's what Brad originially said he'd like to have at the end of year one.
Originally posted by Baikal 3) Here's where Brad just doesnt get it. He's talking about former EQ1 players who are still out there, of the 2 million who played it. Guess what big guy, there is a REASON that they dont anymore. For many folks, it was growing up, getting older, and not having the same time they once did to invest. They found that with a faster, simpler game, they did not need to be hardcore, and spend 8 hours a day playing, they could feel the same reward in less time.
I disagree on two points but agree on one. First, you do not have to be hardcore at all to play Vanguard. The availability of content to log-in and accomplish something meaningful and fun is abundant (more so than WoW, I have found). Second, I think Vanguard is geared toward a more sophisticated and mature gamer; these people really do not want to play LotR or WoW. The market does exist, but Vanguard's atrocious launch created a bad impression it has to recover from. I recently resubscribed, and there is no question they are absolutely making tremendous progress. However, you will not read that here.
I dont think you have to be hardcore to play VG at all, however, many of it's mechanics are definitely associated with the hardcore mentality. Things like it's non-instancing policy, corpse runs, and long travel (pre-riftway). From my point of view, VG probably isnt hardcore, but elements like that give it the appeal to a hardercore audience, and do much to turn off a casual audience. Think about it, the audience they are now trying to appeal to, and their mechanics arent ones consistent with what's previously shown in other games to appeal to casuals. Does it make it more sophisticated and mature? No, not really, but it's a different gamer. I apologize if my original post was unclear and implied that you had to be hardcore. I think in some ways that's a perception, and not a reality, although the trusim Perception is reality can also be applied in some small way.
Yes, I agree that the market exists, but from a financial success point of view, no way they should have been spending 30+ million on this game to appeal to a sub-500k type of market. I just dont see that the features that they have at this time, do much for many people who prefer to play on a casual basis, and like it or not, that is the current direction of the genre. I'm glad gamers who want something more have it with VG, but I think everyone would be more positive if VG had spent half the money they did.
Hehe, none of that really matters anyhow. What matters is people find a game that they enjoy playing, and choices are a good thing from a consumer point of view. I genuinely hope that whatever happens with VG, it'll fill a niche for the genre, and allow people to enjoy it for a long time to come.
Comments
If I can correct you on this, SOE bought Vanguard from Sigil due to Sigil financial issues. SOE pushed for the premature release of Vanguard not Sigil.
Planetside (great game, but due to poor management from SOE the game is all screwed up. Poor maintenance, poor updates, raising the monthly subcription after doing an update.. pathetic, etc)
SWG (Do I need to say anything about this game?)
EQ 2 (Good game, unfortunately the greed of SOE shined on this game 3 expansions and 3 adventure packs, all at cost nothing for free or discounted for player loyalty)
Vanguard (Good game, unfortunately released 3 months before it should)
Matrix Online (LOL this is joke or a game)
Seems to me that there is more than 1 or 2 games in question
No you are wrong.
1.) Sigil took about 5 years and 30 million dollars to develop this title.
2.) Sigil was orginally signed up with Microsoft.
3.) Microsoft dumped Sigil because they were not meeting their benchmarks and the game was clearly behind in development.
4.) Sigil went shopping for a new publisher after being dumped by Microsoft. They found one called SOE and signed a contract with SOE.
5.) The contracted deal allowed SOE the right to manage the servers and advertise the game in exchange for giving Sigil continued development dollars in order to get the game out the door.
6.) Sigil are currently the owners of Vangaurd.
7.) Sigil still have development control over Vangaurd hence the post of Brad suggesting the eventual selling out of their development control of VG to SOE.
Brad and the gang have yet again run out of steam, money and ability and now they can't fix their broken game. Out of all the publishers Sigil could of gone with they decided to go with SOE because Brad knew that if things went wrong he could sell out to SOE like he did with EQ1.
Please get your facts straight before posting on the internet again.
You should also get your facts straight. You are being too generous and giving SOE a complete pass.
It is a fact that SOE developers worked on Vanguard prior to it being released. Therefore they knew what kind of condition the game was in, and that is was not ready to be launched, yet they marketed it as being complete and released it as ready.
Launching an incomplete and buggy product is a recipe for failure, and either SOE is completely clueless or they acted fraudulently with Sigil.
Some of what you say is true but one thing you fail to realize is that a marketing campaign doesn't take place overnight. What little advertising that was done for Vanguard was planned and started well before any release date. While SOE development may have known of the problems it was probably too late to do anything about them. SOE marketing probably began their marketing campaign almost as soon as Sigl and SOE came to an agreement. Even if SOE devs knew about all the problems, once the ball started rolling they were powerless to stop it. So all they could do was fix as much as they could before the live date.
Bottom line is that Vanguard's condition and predicament lies solely on the heads of Brad McQuaid and Jeff Butler. They were the leadership at Sigil. They mismanaged time and money and despite what they say were given the boot by Microsoft. SOE may be guilty of many things but in the case of Vanguard they really tried to help. It's sort of like Bioware's relationship with Obsidian. Vanguard would have never been released in any form had SOE not bailed Sigil out. I'm not so sure SOE taking over is such a bad thing. They have the manpower and resources to put into it to get things straightened out. From a game player's perspective SOE may be evil and a bunch of foul ups but they are a business. Everything they do is motivated towards making them and their shareholders more money. Sometimes they goof up (SWG) and sometimes they end up making good (EQ2). If anybody could turn Vanguard around and make a profit with it my bet is on SOE. They may be an lot of things but they know how to make money.
Actually subs are up quite a bit lately. I would hardly call EQ2 a failure. Just because you did not like the changes does not mean that most of us agree with you.
And I would point out that EQ2 still has about 3x the subs that VG does.
You have to admit that EQ2 didn't even meet half of its initial projections in the first year or so. Down 50% subscribers and consolidating servers is a failure. It may not be a bankruptcy close the doors failure, but that is a failure considering the overhead and expected return on investment. It set quite a few standards of what not to do in MMOs and business sense.Well the fact is, EQ1 was hardly ever a polished game until perhaps the past couple of years.
In fact, a good portion of what many people liked about EQ1 were actually unintended gameplay, bugs, or exploits that were never fixed.
Things like fear kiting, FD pulls, and many other things were NEVER intended, yet it became standard procedure to the point where Brad pretended it was actually "working as intended".
Very very solid points. It really made me think about some of the EQ nostalgia in a new light.Oh my... I dunno, somehow I despair over the dominance of black/white thinking. VG is boring and cold enough atm for me not to play it. But it is not that VG is a total disaster with no base to build on. Its complicated and the odds arent good but it is not necessarily doomed.
And fyi: SOE is as good or bad as ANY game company is. They all made some things good and some bad and some plain ugly, so come down from your high moral judgement thrones back to reality. Objectively the probability that SOE will save the game is a great as they screw it. There isnt any really logical reason for a biased assumption what will happen if SOE gets control. There are many scenarios and I cant see any of them is more valid atm as the other scenarios. Get a grip and admit you dont know the future just as I dont.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Well the fact is, EQ1 was hardly ever a polished game until perhaps the past couple of years.
In fact, a good portion of what many people liked about EQ1 were actually unintended gameplay, bugs, or exploits that were never fixed.
Things like fear kiting, FD pulls, and many other things were NEVER intended, yet it became standard procedure to the point where Brad pretended it was actually "working as intended".
Very very solid points. It really made me think about some of the EQ nostalgia in a new light. I wasn't saying EQI was perfect. I'm just saying that SOE and McQuaid both have been sitting around scratching their butts for 7 years now trying to figure out how to break that 500,000 mark that they hit with EQI. What they miss completely is that people were forgiving of the problems back then but now in the shadow of WOW you have to release a polished product. EQ2 and SWG easilly could have broke 500,000 subscribers if they had not released both as unfinished crap. SWG could've broke a million or two if it had been done right but even it got 300,000+ subscribers as a buggy unfinished game based on the IP. Now we see buggy and unfinished instead drops you into the barely breaking 100,000 subscriber category with VG (just guessing could be lower now).1. SOE takes over
2. SOE creates the Vanguard Combat Upgrade
3. SOE creates the Vanguard New Gaming Experience
Okay, so I lied...
4. SOE declares Vanguard to be as good as SWG
You may think of this as cynical, I think of as inevitable.
Good luck!
I just stopped back to see how things were going with this game. Doesn't look too good!
I played back in beta and I gave up. OMG, it was horrible! I had a lot of hopes for this game, too. But I can't say after reading McQuaid's latest that it changed my mind. Things look totally worse now than ever.
Oh well. At least I didn't spend any money on it!
PS: Was he drunk when he wrote that? LOL
Unfortunately, as one who has resubscribed, I know it is difficult if not impossible to obtain an accurate, fair, and honest idea about the current state of Vanguard. I would not use MMORPG Vanguard forums for reliable information on Vanguard because people who currently play the game are subjected to trolling, flaming, and personal attacks. Individuals who currently play the game and want to discuss the game and what is it like today will often not bother because it is not worth being subjected to trolling, flaming, and the general hatred that people emotionally vomit. Further, there is a lot of hatred toward this game, and sometimes people direct that hatred toward current Vanguard-players on this forum. Nevertheless, they are angry and use (abuse) MMORPG to vent that anger.
Unfortunately, as one who has resubscribed, I know it is difficult if not impossible to obtain an accurate, fair, and honest idea about the current state of Vanguard. I would not use MMORPG Vanguard forums for reliable information on Vanguard because people who currently play the game are subjected to trolling, flaming, and personal attacks. Individuals who currently play the game and want to discuss the game and what is it like today will often not bother because it is not worth being subjected to trolling, flaming, and the general hatred that people emotionally vomit. Further, there is a lot of hatred toward this game, and sometimes people direct that hatred toward current Vanguard-players on this forum. Nevertheless, they are angry and use (abuse) MMORPG to vent that anger.
Considering I can go back in your post history and see you slamming the game just a few weeks ago makes me wonder about the validity of your assertions about the game. If the game has changed so drastically then why don't you start a new thread with a comprehensive review and a comparison of how the game was just a few weeks ago when you called it a nightmare with how you are finding it today.
I would much rather read something like that as opposed to you hitting every single thread and making personal attacks on people who don't happen to agree with your point of view.
However, after I resubscribed (on a whim) I did realize that what the flamers/trollers/haters were stating was very far removed from the current state of the game. When I began to talk about changes and the need for an objective, truthful, and unbiased discussion on the current state of Vanguard, my integrity was attacked, I have been trolled (and continue to be), and subjected to repeated (and ongoing) name-calling. I can emotionally sustain these attacks, but it still requires me to return to my point, which is that people who currently play the game are subjected to mean-spirited and dishonest flaming/trolling/hating that prevents meaningful discussion, artistic expression, and a fair and balanced view of Vanguard. The trolls/haters/flamers are very deliberately trying (and in many respects, I concede, succeeding) to stifle discussion here by their disdainful and morally reprehensible tactics.
I am confident in stating that the haters/trollers/flamers who abuse MMORPG are not harming Vanguard but undermining a sense of community, vibrant discussion, and even decency at MMORPG.
2.) Sigil designed Vanguard, not SoE. [ Sigil did design it but SOE still has rights to do what they please because they put money into it for developing. ]
Sigil is responsible for the game's failure, not SoE. [ SOE is responsible just as Sigil is, They are marketed together DUMBSHIT. ]
3.) People are not quitting because SoE is taking over, people are quitting since the game was in beta, simply because it sucks, and that's Sigil's own doing. [ People are quiting because of SOE is taking over, 90% of SOE's Fan base does not trust nor like SOE anymore, Anything to do with SOE game wise is like giving your money free to them for half-ass product(s). ]
4.) Give SoE a break. Beside failing EQ2 launch and SWG NGE 2 years ago, it's not like they have been making crap games for the past 1( years...
[ The day SOE gets a break is the day they stop fu**ing up games they have took over or made. I would rather buy a missle launcher and blow their servers up just to end the repeated $hit they keep doing to their customers. ]
However, the name-calling such as "dumbshit" and the language and the abuse is what I mean when I am referring to an environment in this section that is disgraceful from the trolling/flaming/hating.
However, the name-calling such as "dumbshit" and the language and the abuse is what I mean when I am referring to an environment in this section that is disgraceful from the trolling/flaming/hating.
Ive been ripped off from SOE playing their games, So please pardon my language but thats how I feel towards them personally. If you don't like it or have a problem with it then take a flying leap into a dumpster.
Hell, how long do they NEED to figure the exact terms between Sigil and SOE?
"Is it in their nature to make us wait this long?"
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
I'm wondering if Mcquaid is trying to broker some deal with Sony to sell a portion of the rights to them while maintaning creative control of the game.
I really can't see Sony buying into only a portion of the IP.
Wish they would speed the process up.
I'm wondering if Mcquaid is trying to broker some deal with Sony to sell a portion of the rights to them while maintaning creative control of the game.
I really can't see Sony buying into only a portion of the IP.
Wish they would speed the process up.
I will be as fair as I can. I dont know Brad Mcquaid, never followed his doings in the past, never played EQ1 (besides the trial). I dunno for what he stood or stands. For me, he is just a name. I do know he was the creative leader behind VG, and as it is he has failed in a lot of things. He had 5 years and 30-40 million dollars, much more than most MMO developer have. He had quite a good credit as far as I see and, his own company, which was not burdened with any previous game's weight. In that way he had the best possible chances and he failed. WHY in the name of the devil should ANY company pay HIS debts and leave him in charge after the utter and deep failure?
As it looks he is the problem, not part of the solution. Simply said, he was the captain of the "ship" and the captain is 100% responsible, no matter if he himself really made all the decisions. If the entire thing would have been great he would have the greatest benefit, so its only fair and square he takes the resposibility and leaves someone else in charge. Whoever is not for me to say, I dont even know. Maybe Raph Koster, if I had a free shot to find someone, adding a few Blizzard & Lotro guys. (Spare me the flame, its my opionion. I dont want VG = WOW nor do I think it is like WOW, but they made some things good and you dont need to re-invent the wheel every time. Period.) VG cant and must not be a copy of anything, but some things just ARE proven to work, to be successfull and highly accplaimed. A game that costy in development NEEDS a lot of players, and therefore a certain kowtow to mass market desires. That is a fact and not negotiable.
The most imporant thing IMO what they should answer now is not so much the technical details of the new contracts, policy or whatever. I would like to see a detailled and CLEAR answer where VG is heading to, not some Brad-esque PR hogwash! No more blah blah like "Core gamer" and such mumbo jumbo, I want FACTS, real plans what they change, implement and what remains as it is. No guarantees, but something to get a real understanding where the train is headed to. I think no matter what side you're on we can all agree we want a CLEAR and real answer what the future re-launch will show.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Unfortunately, as one who has resubscribed, I know it is difficult if not impossible to obtain an accurate, fair, and honest idea about the current state of Vanguard. I would not use MMORPG Vanguard forums for reliable information on Vanguard because people who currently play the game are subjected to trolling, flaming, and personal attacks. Individuals who currently play the game and want to discuss the game and what is it like today will often not bother because it is not worth being subjected to trolling, flaming, and the general hatred that people emotionally vomit. Further, there is a lot of hatred toward this game, and sometimes people direct that hatred toward current Vanguard-players on this forum. Nevertheless, they are angry and use (abuse) MMORPG to vent that anger.
It's ok. I didn't have time to read too many of the replies. Brad tends to write so much, it's hard to go through anything else.
If you went through my posting history, it would probably look the same. Way back when, I was really hyped into something new to try. Being an ex-EQ player, this seemed really special and hopeful. But when I got into VG beta, I wasn't only disappointed, I just didn't see them fixing ALL that stuff in the allotted time frame. When they spent even more time changing existing systems, I was convinced it wasn't going to happen. And then there was my own system that couldn't handle it and between the boredom I was experiencing and the frustration I was having with a brand new system, I knew I wouldn't be happy with the launch results. Progress was going very slowly and major decisions were still up in the air, so you knew then that time wasn't on their side. That's kinda the stuff that you do before you even hire a team (I think?), but I'm hardly an expert. That was just my gut feeling.
I scanned a few replies tonight and these are actually not so bad from what I remember of the beta forums. I guess if I stuck it out as long as you guys have I would be saying things out of frustration too, so I do understand both sides.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but reading Brad's post gave me the impression that SOE will probably take the game over eventually. That just means to me that once/if they do even more systems will be revamped and that's going to take even longer. So the sooner they make a decision, the better off those of you still playing will be, I guess. It seems like a lot more patience is going to be required of you and that's asking a lot considering what I'm reading is the current state of the game.
Regardless where your frustration level is at, I have to give all of you a lot of credit for sticking it through this long. It wasn't something I had the time for with work and all. This one took a lot of dedication, patience and gamer expertise. So don't be too hard on yourselves. None of this is your fault. All of your persistence in following it through this far is quite amazing!
I know that doesn't help too much but I don't know what else to say. I'm so sad for all of you.
1) Knowing nothing about the soon to be agreement. I find it hard to believe possible that they could even consider shutting down, and relaunching or allowing free play until they are ready to relauch in the fall. Financially that would be a massive hit, look at the amount of money already dumped in, and then realize that they'd lose all revenue, and STILL have to dump more money in to get it in a worthwile state. It's never been done before, and can you imagine the negative press, and word of mouth the game would receive as a result, even with a re-launch? Sorry, I just dont see it, pitiful stream of revenue or not, I think they have to keep servers open thru it.
2) EQ2 might have picked up more subscribers with the games overall improvement, but they released a few weeks before WoW, and they wanted to be King of the Hill, for their investment, they are only around 350,000 subscribers, which is even lower than VG is suggesting possible for it. In fact, the high point of EQ-dom, only saw 500,000 subscribers, and EQ2 has not even reached that level, YET. Dont get me wrong, game might be great, and many people may have migrated back to it, but it's still not at 2001-2002 subscriber levels of it's namesake game.
3) Here's where Brad just doesnt get it. He's talking about former EQ1 players who are still out there, of the 2 million who played it. Guess what big guy, there is a REASON that they dont anymore. For many folks, it was growing up, getting older, and not having the same time they once did to invest. They found that with a faster, simpler game, they did not need to be hardcore, and spend 8 hours a day playing, they could feel the same reward in less time. When confronted with choice, well....EQ1 and EQ 2 sub's havent done all that well. I'm not suggesting it's that way for all those folks, maybe many would flock back, but up until now, it hasnt happened, and with more choices, the market gives people a better chance to find something they like. Guess what....some folks when presented with choices, learned that for them there are better ways to do things..a la instancing. (no, it's not everyone's choice, but again, some folks found logging on to do an instanced dungeon more enjoyable than having nothing but contested mobs) It's not that one way or the other is better, but those choices attack the former player base he THOUGHT he once had. For a visionary, he got locked into ONE idea, and completely missed where the market had gone. For a visionary....he was blind.
4) Someone is going to have to pay off that original 30 million, so I dont see it going away completely, UNLESS SoE and Sigil cant strike an agreement. If SOE buys it for pennies on the dollar, they can afford to pay it little attention, consolidate servers, and maybe still make money on it with 100-200k sub's, something Sigil probably can not afford to do right now.
5) Re-launch in the fall....further competition. Pirates of the Burning Sea seems to have a raid fanbase, although I dont know how many it has, Age of Conan was pushed back even though most content was done, in order to release with max possible polish. Warhammer is early next year, and games like Gods and Heroes and Tabula Rasa are due this year as well. While they may not all appeal to people tired of WoW, each of them WILL take a small contingent that COULD have been VG's. Will people upgrade their systems to eventually be able to be capable of playing VG? Sure, but the better question, is: A year from now, with upgraded systems, and even more choices to be made, will anyone even remember to come back to give VG a shot again, with it's already stained rep?
I disagree on two points but agree on one. First, you do not have to be hardcore at all to play Vanguard. The availability of content to log-in and accomplish something meaningful and fun is abundant (more so than WoW, I have found). Second, I think Vanguard is geared toward a more sophisticated and mature gamer; these people really do not want to play LotR or WoW. The market does exist, but Vanguard's atrocious launch created a bad impression it has to recover from. I recently resubscribed, and there is no question they are absolutely making tremendous progress. However, you will not read that here.
I agree on the point that SIGIL (Brad) overestimated the size and extent of this market. The marketing of Vanguard on old Everquest guilds such as FoH was perplexing for me. Vanguard is an enormous game and complex game, and your effectiveness often is determined by your decisions at home in terms of what stances to use, what spells to use, how to use your points and so forth.
In conclusion, I do not think "dumbing" Vanguard down to a LotR or WoW level is necessary. Instead, I think they should steadily keep on the course they are on (believe it or not if you do not currently play the game!) and fix bugs and improve performance.
I'm a 35 year old former EQ player who loved playing it for years. The reason I don't play EQ, EQ2, WoW, SWG, SB, CoH, CoV, DAoC and damn near every other MMO on the market today is because they are ALL faster and simpler. Even Vanguard has fallen into the same routine of making the game so "casual friendly" that there is just no sense of accomplishment. It is so easy for single player games to cater to people who like quick/easy games AND those who prefer a longer/harder version by simply adding different challenge levels.(easy/normal/difficult) If everyone wanted an easy game, why do so many single player games offer different levels of challenge?
How many games on todays market offer challenging progression from lowest to highest level? None that I know of. They have all gone the easy route and honestly I cannot blame anyone for staying in a game they presently enjoy instead of switching to another easy game that they have to start from scratch. Hell look at the LoTRO forums and 2 weeks after launch people are already complaining that the game is too simple and boring. Sorry, not everyone wants to go the simple/easy route you are trying to sell.
When players are soloing from 1-50 in less than 2 months I really have a hard time understanding how people can claim that VG was made for hardcore gamers. Maybe they still believe core is short for hardcore, I don't know, it just boggles me that anyone would think VG is anything but a casual game. They have barely implemented any raiding what-so-ever so all you really have is solo and group content. Yet I keep reading posts about how VG was made for the hardcore raiders?
Sorry, I just don't get all of these posts promoting simple games when you have about 30 of them on the market now competing for the same player base and none left for those who seek a challenge.
I agree with this 100% its all over but the crying.
I agree completely. The amount of available solo content from tasks, Quests, epic Quests, and missives is far-reaching in Vanguard. The direction might be to "dumb" down Vanguard, but I do not necessarily think solo content does that. However, MMORPGs in general, in particular LotR, are very linear, forced, and in a general sense easy. The sense of challenge, the spice of danger, and thrill are just not there.
I'm a 35 year old former EQ player who loved playing it for years. The reason I don't play EQ, EQ2, WoW, SWG, SB, CoH, CoV, DAoC and damn near every other MMO on the market today is because they are ALL faster and simpler. Even Vanguard has fallen into the same routine of making the game so "casual friendly" that there is just no sense of accomplishment. It is so easy for single player games to cater to people who like quick/easy games AND those who prefer a longer/harder version by simply adding different challenge levels.(easy/normal/difficult) If everyone wanted an easy game, why do so many single player games offer different levels of challenge?
How many games on todays market offer challenging progression from lowest to highest level? None that I know of. They have all gone the easy route and honestly I cannot blame anyone for staying in a game they presently enjoy instead of switching to another easy game that they have to start from scratch. Hell look at the LoTRO forums and 2 weeks after launch people are already complaining that the game is too simple and boring. Sorry, not everyone wants to go the simple/easy route you are trying to sell.
When players are soloing from 1-50 in less than 2 months I really have a hard time understanding how people can claim that VG was made for hardcore gamers. Maybe they still believe core is short for hardcore, I don't know, it just boggles me that anyone would think VG is anything but a casual game. They have barely implemented any raiding what-so-ever so all you really have is solo and group content. Yet I keep reading posts about how VG was made for the hardcore raiders?
Sorry, I just don't get all of these posts promoting simple games when you have about 30 of them on the market now competing for the same player base and none left for those who seek a challenge.
Couple of things....
I'd submit that you are in the minority of people out there, and simple things like subscriber numbers for games would bear that out. I'm not saying that as a negative or even a bad thing, but it's also saying that the mainstream games arent attractive to you, but they are attractive to a much larger group of people than you. You may not like faster and simpler, that's fine, but I'd wager for each person like you, I could probably pull down at least 10 people who do, just by going to forums like WoW, and all the other games you mention. There is nothing wrong with what you like, I'm just saying it's simply not mainstream. (that's no comment on good or bad)
It's tough to launch the 2nd most expensive MMO to date, and have it seeking a niche market. Call it sub 500k. Only reason I use that number is because that's what EQ was at it's peak, and because that's what Brad originially said he'd like to have at the end of year one.
I disagree on two points but agree on one. First, you do not have to be hardcore at all to play Vanguard. The availability of content to log-in and accomplish something meaningful and fun is abundant (more so than WoW, I have found). Second, I think Vanguard is geared toward a more sophisticated and mature gamer; these people really do not want to play LotR or WoW. The market does exist, but Vanguard's atrocious launch created a bad impression it has to recover from. I recently resubscribed, and there is no question they are absolutely making tremendous progress. However, you will not read that here.
I dont think you have to be hardcore to play VG at all, however, many of it's mechanics are definitely associated with the hardcore mentality. Things like it's non-instancing policy, corpse runs, and long travel (pre-riftway). From my point of view, VG probably isnt hardcore, but elements like that give it the appeal to a hardercore audience, and do much to turn off a casual audience. Think about it, the audience they are now trying to appeal to, and their mechanics arent ones consistent with what's previously shown in other games to appeal to casuals. Does it make it more sophisticated and mature? No, not really, but it's a different gamer. I apologize if my original post was unclear and implied that you had to be hardcore. I think in some ways that's a perception, and not a reality, although the trusim Perception is reality can also be applied in some small way.
Yes, I agree that the market exists, but from a financial success point of view, no way they should have been spending 30+ million on this game to appeal to a sub-500k type of market. I just dont see that the features that they have at this time, do much for many people who prefer to play on a casual basis, and like it or not, that is the current direction of the genre. I'm glad gamers who want something more have it with VG, but I think everyone would be more positive if VG had spent half the money they did.
Hehe, none of that really matters anyhow. What matters is people find a game that they enjoy playing, and choices are a good thing from a consumer point of view. I genuinely hope that whatever happens with VG, it'll fill a niche for the genre, and allow people to enjoy it for a long time to come.